I've got a buddy who swears by Mike Mentzer, swears that his buddy is the authority on powerlifting because he holds an APF record, swears that his training method is the end all, swears that he has no reason to squat but when he does he will easily blow me out the water...know someone like this...lol

what are your thoughts about this type of guy and his philosophy?

Abaddon

06-26-2011 10:10 AM

wanker

BendtheBar

06-26-2011 10:47 AM

My thought is that progression and persistence work wonders, and can propel just about any approach. With that said, I do not like mixing heavy weight and training to failure. Some exercises can easily be trained to failure, yet some are extremely dangerous.

Mike (and most of the HITers) never, to my knowledge, acknowledged a difference between exercises. They lumped all exercises into one big pool.

I can easily train to failure on some exercises with it beating up my body. Barbell rows are an example of this for me. Others, like overhead barbell presses, beat the snot out of my body when I train to failure.

Training to failure works far more than the muscles...CNS, connective tissue, joints, etc.

Gordon LaVelle, who trains more like Dorian Yates, incorporates periodization to this equation, allowing for light, medium and heavy training days so that he isn't killing the body every workout.

I am not completely condemning failure for all lifts, at all times. I am merely saying Mike and Heavy Duty should have explored more the differences between exercises, and focused on solid exercise selection.

Is it the be all end all? No, not in my mind. It's at the polar opposite of the spectrum, and high volume is on the other.

J_Byrd

06-26-2011 08:14 PM

I dont think anyone is the be all end all. I mean even stuff Louie Simmions says, just does not work for my body. Everyone is different in some degree. If you stay in this game long enough, you will find what works for you.